List time-off requests

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description only needs to add context. It does add that requests are scoped to the workspace and that pending is a focus, but it doesn't disclose behaviors like pagination, ordering, or how the status filter interacts with the response.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, compact sentence that conveys the core purpose and a use case. It is front-loaded and free of fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list operation with no required parameters and no output schema, the description plus annotations and schema provide enough context. It could mention the return format or that it lists all requests filtered by status, but the essential behavior is clear.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents the status and workspace_id parameters. The description adds no additional semantics beyond what's already present, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The title says 'List time-off requests' and the description 'Requests in the workspace' clearly identifies the resource and action, though it relies on the title for the verb. The note about pending requests being what an approver looks for adds context and helps differentiate from related list tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies this tool is for viewing time-off requests, particularly pending ones for approvers, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like clockify_list_approval_requests. The usage context is hinted but not fully specified.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.